Policy On Rejected Rams At Fair Reaffirmed

Press, Volume CIV, Issue 30936, 17 December 1965, Page 8

Policy On Rejected Rams At Fair Reaffirmed

The Canterbury Agricultural and Pastoral Association’s general committee reaffirmed its policy that rams for the association’s flock ram fair rejected after an inspection are to be slaughtered. The sheep committee had put forward a recommendation to the general committee which included a request that particular attention should be paid to foot-rot in rams to be exhibited at the flock ram fair and that the “slaughter clause” should be deleted. Mr 3. H. Ensor said there was no slaughter clause in the rules. An Instruction that rejected rams should be slaughtered had been added to a clause that the rejected rams became the property of the association and that the association had the right to dispose of them. The so-called slaughter clause had done much to improve the standard of the flock ram fair, and he felt that to delete it would be retrograde. Mr J. R. Todhunter agreed and he added that there was a right af appeal against an inspector’s decision that a ram should be rejected, and he

had served on appeal panels which had allowed rejected rams to be taken home. Mr W. R. Oliver said the rams which had been rejected were a disgrace and should not have been at the fair. He disagreed with another speaker who had said that the rams had been rejected in the past on fine breed points. The committee agreed that the present rules should be adhered to and reaffirmed that rams rejected for the fair should be slaughtered. The meeting was told that in cases of foot-rot all an exhibitor’s entries were disqualified, his entrance fees were forfeit, and the affected sheep had to remain in a selected pen till one hour after selling on that day had been completed.